SOMEONE ELSE'S FRACTION

 

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

An astitute hard working professional waiting for someone else /Photo Courtesy /Tima Miroshnichenko

Trust Problem

Who ate a primary source’s lunch? In the past, the source of something had value. The original account of someone about something made the difference between the truth and hearsay. The source carried the actuality of the event. Everything that happened in that place or about that person. Everyone wanted the account of the source. Because having the right information about something or someone opens a pathway to progress. The right information helps someone who needs that information to make the right decision. These decisions mean something to people who are waiting for a verdict. The verdict will ascertain whether they make progress or not. So the source must convey the right information. Because other people’s lives depend on that information. That is one reason why the source matters.

The source has correct information about what the decision-maker needs. The decision-maker only needs to identify the right source and ask questions. From the questions. The decision-maker will collect important information about the source. Then he or she can use that information to arrive at the right decision. But a shift is taking place in modern society. The source is gradually losing relevance. Because even after the source has provided the right information. Information that is quality enough for the decision-maker to decide. The decision-maker still thinks something is missing. One complete account is not enough. Backup is needed. And it should come from someone else. Someone that only knows a fraction of the source. Yet, the fraction has become the game changer. The verdict now depends on what a fraction says or does not say.

The decision-maker needs that fraction before proceeding with anything else. But the account of someone else’s fraction has gaps. A fraction does not tell the whole story. A fraction only tells part of the story. The story of how he/she has encountered or interacted with the source. It is a short story. A very important story. That is why the decision-maker wants to hear it. The decision-maker is interested in the experience. It is about how the individual felt while using the source’s services. Such as, the quality of the services. And whether the source is good enough with his or her offerings. The decision-maker wants to know all those things. Things that he/she could have asked the source. The decision-maker called someone with a fraction of your story a reference.

 Why is A Fraction Important?

An organized man giving his fraction /Photo /Ro Acunha 

Even though you told the decision-maker that you are good at what you do. The decision-maker put aside what you told him/her. Now your future is in the word of another person. If that person conveys a misrepresentation. It is that misinterpretation that will be used to judge whether you are worthy or not. The worthiness that the reference needs to confirm to the decision-maker. Focuses on the past interaction with your work. That could be a brief past. However, the experience carries value at this moment.  The decision-maker does not care that you are good. He also does not care that you have spent a lot of time improving your craft. You have actually worked with a lot of different people. And you have gained enough experience. You had actually told the decision-maker about it. You even backed up all that talk with real evidence.

But all that effort does not seem to work. The decision maker wants more. And the more that he is asking for comes from a secondary source. But I would like to be clear. I have no problem with references. References are supposed to vouch for you. Based on the knowledge they have about you. And in most occasions, they will confirm what you had already provided. Someone that needed to solve a problem. Would have just believed you the first time you said you were good. If the individual was actually in charge. He/she could have made the decision with what was already in front of him or her. There was no need for a long line. The decision-maker did not need another ten minutes to only confirm what was already there. He/she should have just trusted you. And just asked questions in case of doubts. The primary source was right there. And has all necessary information. Yet, all these critical things were not enough. A third party had to be called to verify.

What is Wrong with the Boss?

A beautiful baby understading someone else's fraction /Photo Courtesy /Willsantt 

That is fascinating in its own right. We have not even asked the question of Who is in charge. Between the decision-maker and the reference? The decision-maker had to wait for the knowledge of someone who only has part of the full story to decide. A reference might have a full year’s account of you. However, you are the story. You have spent ten years providing the same service. In the course of all these years. You have met a lot of people. You can produce a whole list. A long list for that matter. And all that long list will convey the same message. A message that you had already given. Someone only needed to trust you. And make that important decision. If the decision-maker was really interested in solving a problem. You were the solution. You have been there. You know all the routes to the right solutions. However, two other people from your list were need to say the same thing.

If the decision-maker was in charge from the beginning. Why did he need a list? References carry crucial information about other people. Their role in other people’s progress is well noted. But why do decision-makers use a fraction to judge. If a picture has already been drawn in front of you. Do you still need the input of another person to tell you that it is good? Someone who claims to be in charge should know how to judge. To tell the difference between good and bad. To know what he needs and what he does not need. In fact, someone in charge should know exactly what he or she is looking for from something or someone. Third parties might have crucial information. However, their opinion should only act as extra information to what the boss has already determined. At no point should a reference influence an outcome.    

A reference only supplements facts. Even in circumstances where a reference is missing. The person in charge should still make a decision. That is what being in charge means. Swiftness. Nimbleness. And clarity. However, when everything else had to wait for someone else’s fraction. We surely have a problem. The decision-maker is the problem. He/she does not know what is needed. Because when the right information was placed at the center. He still questioned it. The decision-maker had to rely on information that has gaps to decide. A reference only has a few years of your experience. But the source has a complete experience. The primary source has the whole roller coaster. So what is wrong with people in charge? Is it about problem solving or something else? Because if it is about solving a problem. I was already the solution.